Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1887-04-08
w C. r U.
Thisoolumn Is sEiited underthe Direction
ofThe w. O. 4. Union oJPerry,barg.1
Satisfactory to saloou-Kcepcrs.


Jim Boyle, in His recent letter 10 the
Cincinnati Commercial Gazette, has shown
up the whole true inwarAues, Of the, small
amendment to the Dow law, passed In the
cloaing hours of the late Legislature. We
give that portion of his letter entire, aud
it will bear careful perusnl;
Promptly, ns sOun NJ their rightful ma
jOriiy IN each branch OF tie General AS
-embly had been secured, the Republicans
re-enactcd the Scott law, sud thus fulfilled
their solemn promises during the cam
paign. The general feeling Of the party
waa that no further Legislation on the liq-
nor question should he undertaken. At
iempla were made, however, to extend the
local option feature OF the Scott Tor Dow
law, but they failed, nnd there Ia now nl-
most universal scquiesence IN the proposi-
tion that wisdom cunsiSls IN letting we'll
enough alone until full and inir test Of
the law has been made by experience. 1t
IL true that slight amendment 10 the Dow
law has been made, but ii il purely tech
nical one, although its special friends
claim that 1t will have great practical
effect. The Pavey amendment 10 the Dow
law is really nothing but constructionsl Of
the admitted intent OF the law when orig
inallv passed. 1t does not introduce any
new feature, but tixes beyond perndventure
what was always intended, namely, 10 give
local sovereignty TO municipalities also TO
the liquor traffic. Cincinnati has the
freest kind OF local option. Rural munic-
ipalitiea claim the same right. Ii waa the
intention Of the Legislature to grant that
riuIf IN fb., Gnnit a,,I n,,, 10, Dnt tha
feature of The law, had, ii is claimed,
weak spot. The probabilities altogether
ARE that the last Court of Appeal would
have declared against the evasion of the
law. Still the fact remains that munich
paities have been cheated out of their
righls. They have voted away saloons,
but through the opening referred TO, brew
ers and disiillers have crept in and eslab-
lished agencies" The practical effect of
the operation of the local option clause
therefore has been that legitimate saloon
keepers have been discriminsled against,
and non-reSident brewers and distillers
have been privileged to have a monopoly
OF beer and iquor-selling-and this, too,
mind you, against the PLAIN intent of the
law and contrary 10 the expressed wish of
the voters Of the municipality. The
pressure upon the Legislature TO wipe out
the gallon agency fraud has been irresiSti-
BILE. Public sentiment throughout the
rural municipalities has grown intense on
The subject. ObserverB whose range oil
vision is limited by the hills around Gin
cinnati can hardly appreciate the situation
throughout the State. Had this Pavey,
(or better still, the Brown amendment not
been passed, this Legislature would have
been charged with bad faith in not giving
the municipalities what il professed to
have given-that it had given local SOW
ereignty by name, but not in reality, and
that il knowingly permitted a technical
flaw to exist, whereby Cincinnati, Cleve-
land, Toledo and Columbus brewers were
enabled 10 defy the public sentiment and
the expressed will of the people OF any
rural municipality in the State. This was
the great bombshell reserved by the Pro-
hibilion fanatics. But the Legislature
has disarmed them, and has taken from
them the right TO charge il with bad faith.
The saloon men have also been deprived
OF cause of complaint ns 10 the opera
lions of local option. They have Justly
complained that il was not right when
they were closed out in municipalities,
rich brewers and distillers, aud non resi-
denta at that, should be allowed TO conduct
a business by a clear evasion of the law in
the establishment of so-called agencies.
| The attempt of come Cincinnati brewers to
arouse the legitimate saloon keepers on
this question ia case OF false pretenses,
Legitimate saloon-keepers are not inter
ested at all except 10 commend this Legis.
la,ure Tor not consenting to a monopoly OF
privileges through plain evasion OF the
law. Now this is the entire question in q
nut shell.
II will be noticed that according to hi
statement the impelling motive was sim
ply fear Of the growth OF the Prohibition
party vote. Petitions and prayers hsv,
been absolutely without effect. That
something had had effect ia evident from
his statement that "the pressure upon the
Legislature TO wipe out the gallon agency
fraud, has been irresistable." The pressur,
that could induce the Vulksblatt legisla-
tnre TO pass any law even squinting Al
temperance must have been ifresistable
What this pressure was Is shown by hi
further statement that this was the grea
bomhshell reserved by the Prohibition
fanatics. But the Legislature has dis
armed them" 1t was thus the fear of til,
Prohibition party vote, and the object o
the measure was not 10 promote temper
ance but TO disarm the Prohibition party
Notice also the statement that by hi
amendment "the saloon men have bee
also deprived of a cause OF complaint.
Wonderful amendment, surely. II dis
arms the Pruhibilionirts and "temperanc
fanatics" and at the game time remove
c"uRe Of complaint from the saloon men.
Perhaps the people OF Ohio are 30 won
derfnlly dull that they will bite st such a
unbaiied hook as this. But We doubt i
Next November we shall see what we sha
-ee.-New Era.
|